Publish a supplied document through a bilingual website PR

Why use this

1. Publishing one document on a bilingual site can affect more than the download folder. Navigation labels, translated summaries, sorting conventions and relative links must agree, or one language’s page can silently point to the wrong asset.

2. This job could package the change as a focused pull request. A bilingual checklist helps the owner verify language, links and document identity separately from the project’s automated build results.

Why an agent / simpler alternative

Useful judgment

Infer repository conventions and coordinate related changes across localized content files.

Simpler alternative

Edit through the existing content management interface when it supports the document type and both languages.

Unsuitable when

Publication rights, translation ownership or the intended release date are unresolved.

Proposed inputs

1. Name

   Publication packet

   Owner

   Content owner

   Minimum scope

   Approved document, title, date and authorized descriptions in both languages

   Quality check

   Confirm the file is final and appropriate for public distribution.

2. Name

   Repository conventions

   Owner

   Repository owner

   Minimum scope

   Relevant listing files, localization rules and contribution instructions

   Quality check

   Identify the correct branch and avoid unrelated repository changes.

Access and setup — proposed or unknown

Proposed minimum

1. Inspect the scoped repository and work on a change branch with the document’s approved metadata.

Compatibility unknowns

1. Unknown: repository permissions, local build environment and localization validation support.

External actions requiring approval

1. Uploading the document, opening a PR, triggering deployment or merging publication changes.

Expected deliverable and review checks

Proposed artifact

Focused PR with document addition, bilingual listing changes, check results and review notes.

Critical checks

1. Both language pages link to the intended file with consistent dates and titles.

2. The diff contains no unrelated assets, secrets or accidental content replacements.

Missing output evidence

No new workflow run or output inspection is performed for this editorial layer. The linked implementation evidence retains the original source-specific outcome and artifact limits.

Failure signals and proposed responses

1. Signal

   One locale copies the other locale’s description unchanged.

   Why it matters

   The site appears bilingual while presenting untranslated or misleading content.

   Proposed response

   Compare each field with approved language copy and hold uncertain translation for review.

2. Signal

   A filename change breaks an existing document link.

   Why it matters

   A small publication task can damage earlier content.

   Proposed response

   Check inbound references and preserve the established URL or propose an explicit redirect.

Effort and cost — unknown

Setup work

1. Confirm publication permission and map the localization conventions.

Ongoing review

1. Review rendered pages and reconcile owner comments before merge.

Unknowns

1. Unknown: build duration, CI charges and translation review effort.

First check — proposed, unexecuted

Status

proposed_unexecuted

Synthetic fixture

A synthetic repository fixture has English and French listing files plus an existing link to a similarly named PDF.

Acceptance checks

1. The proposed diff updates both listings without replacing the old document.

2. Each new link and language label passes a targeted review.

Stop conditions

1. Unapproved public disclosure, deployment or unresolved translation is required.

Limits

1. Proposed tests support review; passing them would not replace the owner’s publication and merge decisions.